NASP Elections - Officer Questions

President-Elect Candidates Respond

Each year the Nominations and Elections Committee poses questions to the candidates to help the membership determine which candidate they would like to see lead NASP. This year we have posted their responses about their qualifications and now we are asking them about an issue that is relevant to the practice of school psychology.  In late December we will send an email to all members with the candidates’ responses to a question about our profession. 

We hope this helps you get to know the candidates better. To see all of the candidate responses please go to: http://www.nasponline.org/about_nasp/elections.aspx

Charles R. Deupree, NCSP
Nominations and Elections Chair

Here is the question:

Considering the trends toward school reform, Response to Intervention services, and the debate regarding the role of traditional assessment, what priorities would you advocate for within NASP? 

Donald Blagg–Candidate for President-Elect

As president-elect of NASP, my primary focus would be to actively address issues facing members.  Our direction is guided by carefully crafted documents that advocate for comprehensive psychological services to children:  our mission statement, Strategic Plan, Blueprint for Training and Practice III, and the Guidelines for the Provision of School Psychological Services. 

Professional development is the key to our success.  In addition to our national conference, summer institutes and publications we need to consider online training, self-study, video-conferences and advanced technology as areas in which we may expand continuing education so that all members can stay current with effective practices and interventions.

In this time of change, NASP can be of value to training programs and school districts through further development of resources.    Our Blueprint and Guideline for Services provide excellent foundations upon which new service delivery models can be developed.  School districts have school psychologists that can function in a variety of roles to support multiple district initiatives.  Given current legislation and research findings, this is a time for school psychologists to strengthen our roles as change agents as we work closely with district and state decision-makers. 

The movement towards data-based decision-making and accountability requires training programs to ensure that curriculum is aligned with new directions. NASP can provide leadership and facilitate conversations as we ensure that new practitioners are well prepared to best address current challenges of children and schools.

My years of experience in districts, various regions, and prior leadership in NASP have provided me with knowledge of issues and organizational know-how.   I am committed to addressing issues and bringing resources to individual members.  I look forward to collaborating with NASP members as we create our future and champion our mission for children.   

Kathleen Minke–Candidate for President-Elect

Considering the trends toward school reform, Response to Intervention services, and the debate regarding the role of traditional assessment, what priorities would you advocate for within NASP?

Jack Bardon, one of school psychology’s early leaders, once wrote something to the effect: “Except for a few statistics, everything I learned in graduate school turned out to be wrong.” This may be an overstatement but it highlights a necessary priority for NASP. Given a rapidly changing knowledge base, all school psychologists must commit to lifelong learning. NASP should take the lead in providing opportunities for high quality continuing professional development for our members. Most of my work within NASP over the past 15 years has reflected this priority through my roles as Professional Growth chair, Convention Committee cochair for program, Convention Committee chair, and coeditor of three NASP books. With steady improvements in technology, we have exciting opportunities to extend the reach of professional development beyond traditional publications, convention and summer institutes, although these remain important. As NASP president, I look forward to continuing to develop innovative training opportunities using web-based technology that will connect our members despite geographic barriers and contribute to their ability to be local leaders in school reform.

The “Response to Intervention” movement has created much discussion within our profession. But, in many respects, the issues are not new. Problem-solving models have been promoted since at least the 1970’s; advocating for “rights without labels” has been around almost as long.  As a profession we have argued about the relative merits of particular kinds of standardized assessment since the dawn of time! OK, I’m exaggerating again, but only a little. “Innovations” tend to operate in predictable ways. There is first a polarization around extreme positions, which is eventually followed by a middle ground that capitalizes on the strengths of the extremes. I think we are reaching the middle ground with RTI. Most researchers and practitioners agree that universal screening and early, systematic intervention for academic and behavior problems are critical to student success. Most agree that when students are unsuccessful there should be careful, detailed assessments and interventions tailored to the individual. Most agree that some students will need intensive intervention that should be supported by special education funding. There is still much to be learned, however. To what extent should school psychologists primarily be instructional leaders or mental health service providers or both? What implications does this question hold for training? When in the problem-solving process for students with LD should standardized assessments be used, if at all? NASP’s priority should be to provide venues for the dissemination of new knowledge that grows from high quality research. NASP leaders should work collaboratively to find areas of consensus on “best practice” in particular areas, while encouraging constructive debate and ongoing research in those areas where there are insufficient data to draw firm conclusions. Our strength as a profession lies in our flexibility, commitment to data-based problem solving, and ability to work toward systems change, despite considerable ambiguities. As NASP president I will facilitate conversations among those with diverse viewpoints to provide practitioners with the necessary tools to make informed decisions in their day to day practice.